It is worth investing in a defense system against incoming asteroids, comets or other near Earth objects. Somewhere out there is a big friggin’ rock with our name on it. It is a question of ‘when’, not ‘if’ Earth will be hit by one of these alien invaders.
For comparative purposes:
The 1908 explosion that flattened a 10,000 square kilometers of forest near the Tunguska River in Siberia was estimated to weight approximately 100,000 tons.
The asteroid that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs (and 70% of all species living at the time) is estimated to have been 10 kilometers in diameter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TABLE OF TERRORS
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/a.buckley/dino.htm
The following data about Near-Earth Objects are from the Anglo-Australian Observatory's research astronomer Duncan Steel's book:
Rouge Asteroids and Doomsday Comets.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About 2,000 objects massive enough (1 km diameter) to cause global catastrophe are known to cross Earth's orbit. Such an impacting object would wipe out 25% of humanity.
About 10,000 objects of 500 m size cross Earth's orbit.
About 300,000 objects of 100 m size cross Earth's orbit.
About 150 million objects of 10 m size cross Earth's orbit.
Some 70% of potential impactors are asteroids; the rest are comets.
About 50% of the Earth-crossing asteroids most likely are extinct or dormant comets.
FREQUENCY OF IMPACTORS:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pea-size meteoroids - 10 per hour
Walnut-size - 1 per hour
Grapefruit-size - 1 every 10 hours
Basketball-size - 1 per month
50-m rock that would destroy an area the size of New Jersey - 1 per 100 years
1-km asteroid - 1 per 100,000 years
2-km asteroid - 1 per 500,000 years
A "nemesis" parabolic comet impactor would give us only a 6-month warning
2006-10-17 13:01:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's an idea but it is impossible to design a defence against a completely unknown attacker. You can also spend millions on a defence that is completely useless if you base the defence on a false evaluation of the threat. The Maginot Line of pre-war France springs to mind. Fixed defences against a fast fluidly mobile attacker. I think that what should be looked at is an international fast response force to respond to any landings. Bombardment from out of space would have to responded to with armed orbital stations and fast launch armed shuttles. None of these measures are politically or technically available at this time.
2006-10-17 18:19:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
because of the fact the percentages are astronomically against there being no different existence interior the universe. it incredibly is totally conceited to think of we are the only existence everywhere and somewhat short sited. evaluate the billions upon billions upon billions of stars and each you may doubtlessly signify a sunlight of a photo voltaic device and your finished argument falls aside. I certainly have witnessed vivid lights like moons in a triangular formation interior the southern sky stick to me and others in a shifting vehicle traveling on interstate 40 for form of 80 miles. That became over 2 an prolonged time in the past, even nonetheless it became there. They have been to huge to be airplane and because i've got not got self assurance in Bible scripture I could make different assumptions.
2016-12-13 10:11:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would say we should have a defense system "out there" for use to defend against weapons (nukes) that first enter space then re-enter. This kind of defense system can be used against possible ET's if they should decide to invade us for our um... resources or whatever else they might um.... want. Yeah.
2006-10-17 12:45:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by Cambion Chadeauwaulker 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
What are we going to defend ourselves against? Nobody's ever actually seen an alien. Do they have lasers or phasers? Photon torpedoes or turbo blasters? We can't defend ourselves against passenger airplanes. What are we gonna do against a superior intelligence who's figured out how to fly through the cosmos?
2006-10-17 12:45:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Gene Rocks! 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'd say if we can land a nuke on an asteroid, which has been proven can be done, then I'd guess we have invested money into projects similiar. The government will NEVER tell you where ALL the money's spent. That, you can count on!
2006-10-17 12:48:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by smartestassofthemall 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Believe it or not the Fire Officers Guide..that is in every firehouse in the nation has a paragraph about ufo crashes or attacks.
2006-10-17 12:50:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by chefzilla65 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
what if the aliens arent interested in taking over the planet to begin with? I think the government is paranoid.
2006-10-17 13:19:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by Nestor Desmond 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do not know of course but a dollar to a donut that someone is going to work tomorrow with a tax funded budget to think about it.
2006-10-17 12:51:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by oldhippypaul 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you watched 'War of the Worlds' you would know we need no defenses. The aliens will die from disease so no use wasting good money.
2006-10-17 12:44:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by Squawkers 4
·
1⤊
0⤋